Trump moves to strip Harvard of certification for student exchange programs
As the President Trump-led US administration's tensions with
Harvard University
intensifies, the former issued a formal notice on Thursday of intent to withdraw the university's certification under the
Student and Exchange Visitor Program
(SEVP), according to Reuters.
Moreover, the notice gave the Ivy League 30 days to present its case as to why its certification should not be revoked.
The move comes a day after President Donald Trump called for a 15% cap on the number of foreign students admitted to the institution and demanded that the university submit a full list of its current international enrollees.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Free P2,000 GCash eGift
UnionBank Credit Card
Apply Now
Undo
"Harvard has got to behave themselves. Harvard is treating our country with great disrespect and all they're doing is getting in deeper and deeper" Trump told reporters gathered in the Oval Office.
(Join our
ETNRI WhatsApp channel
for all the latest updates)
This is among a slew of measures the new US administration has taken against the Ivy League university, which collectively have begun to cripple its foreign student intake and further inflamed an already volatile standoff over federal funding, immigration policy, and ideological control.
Live Events
Federal funds frozen
The conflict began in April when President Trump accused Harvard of fostering 'hate and stupidity,' calling the university 'a JOKE' on his social media platform, Truth Social. He slammed the institution for hiring 'woke, radical left, idiots' and called for an end to its access to federal funding.
Shortly afterward, federal agencies froze $2.2 billion in approved federal funds earmarked for research and academic programs. In addition, a federal antisemitism task force announced that another $450 million would be withheld, citing pro-Palestinian campus protests and alleged harassment of Jewish students.
Visa rights revoked
The administration has increasingly cited campus unrest, particularly pro-Palestinian demonstrations, as justification for its sweeping actions. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced earlier this month that Harvard's license to enroll international students had been revoked, giving the university just 72 hours to provide detailed records of its foreign student body to regain certification.
These moves, combined with Thursday's SEVP decertification notice, have drastically disrupted Harvard's international programs and left thousands of students in legal limbo.
Harvard responds with legal action
In response, Harvard filed a lawsuit in federal court, warning that the government's actions would cause 'immediate and irreparable injury' to the university and its roughly 6,800 international students. The complaint emphasized that these students contribute nearly $400 million in annual tuition and could face deportation if visa access is not restored.
US District Judge Allison D. Burroughs issued a temporary block on the administration's actions, pausing the visa restrictions until a full hearing scheduled for May 29, where the court will decide whether to extend legal protection or allow enforcement to proceed.
Wider campaign targets elite universities
Harvard is not alone in facing federal pressure. In March, the administration rescinded $400 million in federal funding from Columbia University, also citing failure to prevent harassment of Jewish students. Although Columbia implemented several administrative reforms, it still suffered major penalties.
Unlike Columbia, however, Harvard has openly challenged the administration in court, using its $50 billion endowment as a financial buffer to resist political pressure.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
19 minutes ago
- Time of India
Boulder attack: Targeted terror attack unleashed on peaceful Colorado vigil as suspect sets multiple victims on fire
A man allegedly attacked participants by setting multiple people on fire at the Pearl Street Mall in downtown Boulder. Run for their lives The vigil, held by a local Jewish community group called 'Run for Their Lives,' was focused on calling for the release of Israeli hostages currently held in Gaza. The event attracts a group of people who meet weekly to walk or run in solidarity with the hostages, many wearing matching shirts and carrying flags representing the hostages' countries. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Kulkas yang belum Terjual dengan Harga Termurah (Lihat harga) Cari Sekarang Undo Police response At around 1:26 pm, Boulder Police received urgent calls reporting a man with a weapon setting victims on fire. Police Chief Stephen Redfearn said officers responded immediately to find several people with serious burns and other injuries. The victims were transported to local hospitals, while the suspect, who sustained minor injuries, was taken into custody. 'This is a targeted terror attack ,' FBI Director Kash Patel said on social media , confirming that FBI agents are investigating alongside local law enforcement. Live Events Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser called the attack a 'hate crime given the group that was targeted' and condemned the violent act. 'Hate has no place in Colorado,' he said. 'We all have the right to peaceably assemble and speak our views, but these violent acts must stop.' A series of antisemitic attacks The attack occurred on Shavuot, a significant Jewish holiday, compounding the pain felt by the community. It also comes weeks after two Israeli embassy staff were fatally shot outside the Jewish Museum in Washington, DC, in an antisemitic attack. In addition to the violence in Boulder, anti-Israel graffiti was discovered on 18 to 20 buildings at the nearby University of Denver earlier that weekend. Adam Rovner, director of the university's Center for Judaic Studies, described the vandalism as a painful sign of growing hatred and intolerance. Reaction from the Jewish community The Boulder Jewish Community Center released a statement expressing heartbreak over the attack. 'We are saddened to learn that an incendiary device was thrown at walkers during a peaceful vigil,' the center said, emphasizing safety as their highest priority. Videos reviewed by the Anti-Defamation League showed the suspect shouting phrases like, 'How many children have you killed?' and calling for an end to Zionists, indicating the attack was fueled by deep ideological hatred. Colorado Governor Jared Polis condemned the attack as a 'heinous act of terror' and reassured the public that state and federal agencies are supporting the investigation. This attack adds to a troubling wave of antisemitic violence across the US, which has intensified since Hamas' deadly attack on Israel in October 2023 and Israel's subsequent military campaign in Gaza.
Mint
28 minutes ago
- Mint
Where the trade court's tariff decision went wrong
President Donald Trump announces tariffs in the Rose Garden at the White House in Washington, April 2. During a national crisis, an advocate of tariffs testified before Congress that 'reciprocal trade agreements" push foreign nations to stop erecting 'excessive economic barriers to trade." Who said this? President Trump? Sen. Reed Smoot or Rep. Willis Hawley? It was President Franklin D. Roosevelt's secretary of state, Cordell Hull, explaining in 1940 how reciprocal tariffs could reverse unfair trade practices targeting the U.S. Mr. Trump's policy of using reciprocal tariffs to advance U.S. interests isn't a new or radical idea, and it's a necessary one. The U.S. Court of International Trade was wrong to rule on Wednesday that the administration had exceeded its authority in imposing these tariffs. The ruling overlooked history, statute, precedent and national interest. It was a misreading of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, and a misinterpretation of America's bipartisan tradition of using trade policy to defend national economic resilience. On Thursday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit stayed the trade court's ruling while it considers an appeal. In a separate case, a district judge in Washington issued an injunction against the tariffs, although he stayed his own order. The issue requires resolution only the Supreme Court can deliver. Americans should hope the justices side with Mr. Trump. In its May 28 decision, V.O.S. Selections v. U.S., the trade court held that IEEPA doesn't authorize the president to impose 'unbounded" tariffs. The opinion misses the mark on legal and historical fronts. It substitutes policy skepticism for statutory interpretation, undermining legitimate executive authority during declared national emergencies. The trade court's reading of IEEPA contradicts the statute's text and history. IEEPA's independent emergency authority allows the president to regulate, prevent or prohibit the importation of property in which foreign countries or nationals have an interest. The language mirrors that of the earlier Trading with the Enemy Act, which President Richard Nixon used to impose a universal 10% tariff in 1971. The courts upheld Nixon's use of that power in U.S. v. Yoshida International (1975), concluding that tariffs were a sensible approach to regulating imports during a declared emergency. Congress enacted IEEPA in 1977 with language directly drawn from the Trading with the Enemy Act. The trade court's description of the tariffs as 'unbounded" also contradicts Mr. Trump's painstakingly specific April 2 executive order, which imposes precise duties, product exemptions and country-specific rates. I should know: I helped coordinate their implementation. Further, the court errs in implicitly inviting itself to review the sufficiency of the president's emergency declaration. IEEPA requires only that the president declare a national emergency 'to deal with an unusual and extraordinary threat" arising outside the U.S., which is exactly what the executive order does. Trade deficits can qualify as emergencies. In the Trade Act of 1974, Congress recognized that 'large and serious" balance-of-payments deficits could justify swift presidential action, including tariffs and quotas. This act's unique procedures didn't preclude similar IEEPA authorities addressing identical threats. Second-guessing presidential responses to emergencies defies precedent. In Dames & Moore v. Regan (1981), the Supreme Court acknowledged the validity of President Jimmy Carter's hostage crisis response, intact to this day, which froze Iranian property in the U.S. Courts have long held that the political branches—not judges—determine how to deal with foreign economic threats that rise to emergency levels. Further, in Field v. Clark (1892), the justices held that 'it is often desirable, if not essential . . . to invest the President with large discretion in matters arising out of the execution of statutes relating to trade and commerce with other nations." While IEEPA gives the president significant latitude, Congress can terminate a national emergency by joint resolution. That Congress hasn't thwarted Mr. Trump's tariffs counsels restraint in questioning his decision. The trade court evidently yearns to restore misguided economic orthodoxy. But frictionless global trade remains a mirage. Even John Maynard Keynes, hardly an economic nationalist, cautioned against the utopian allure of borderless commerce: 'Let goods be homespun whenever it is reasonably and conveniently possible, and, above all, let finance be primarily national." The pursuit of a perfectly undistorted global market ignores American history and legal tradition. Hull's reciprocal-tariff program of the 1930s—the foundation of U.S. multilateral trade—was premised on the imposition of duties on imports from countries that refused to lower theirs. Hull understood that economic resets require leverage. The test of judicial reasoning is whether it honors the text, structure and history of the law it interprets. The Court of International Trade fell short of that test. Mr. Bogden is a fellow at the Steamboat Institute and a former clerk for the U.S. Court of International Trade.
Hindustan Times
34 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
BJP gears up for civic elections in Kerala
The Kerala unit of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has begun preparations for the local body elections scheduled for November, having completed a detailed survey of all 941 village panchayats, 87 municipalities and14 district panchayats, people familiar with the matter said. The local body elections will be followed by the assembly elections in the southern state next year. Having set a target of winning at least 250 local bodies, the BJP has revamped its Kerala unit by appointing 16 senior leaders as in-charges of the organisational districts and 1,400 leaders as panchayat and municipal cluster in-charges. 'Preparations for the local body polls are in full swing. After the new state president (Rajeev Chandrashekhar) was appointed in March, the party carried out a detailed study of the gram panchayats, all the 152 block panchayats, six corporations and the district panchayats. This has helped us assess the ground situation and set our targets and work out how many representatives will be contesting the local body polls,' a person aware of the details said. In the previous polls, the BJP had won 22 gram panchayats, two corporations and two municipalities in 2020, when the elections to the 1,199 local bodies were held in three phases. The party, however, drew a blank in the 140-member assembly polls a year later. The person cited above said the state unit will soon begin an electoral training camp for karyakartas (workers) across one lakh (100,000) wards in Kerala through 'Nisha Shilpashala' camps that will be held at 1,400 locations over two weeks. 'Once the training is complete, the workers will begin the task of preparing the booth-level voters lists,' the person said. With an eye on expanding its footprint in the southern state — where it had managed to win one Lok Sabha seat (out of 20) in the previous general elections last year — the BJP has carried out a membership drive and ensured there is representation of different castes and faiths. 'As soon as the new state president's term began, we started work on strengthening booth committees. These committees were formed in just 2,100 of over 25,000 booths, with fewer than 20,000 booth karyakartas (workers). A special campaign was launched in the first week of May to raise this number to over 8,500 booth committees and nearly 90,000 karyakartas,' the person cited above said. In April, the party launched the 'Vikasita Keralam (developed Kerala)' campaign to highlight the 'administrative lapses' of the chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan led-LDF government, alleging it led to 'economic slowdown' in the state. 'As part of the Vikasita Keralam collective effort, ward-level teams were formed at the panchayat and municipal levels. Each team had five members, including at least one woman and one from the SC community. As a result, one lakh (100,000) karyakartas—forming the Vikasita Keralam ward teams are ready to hit the ground,' the person said. Booth workers have been identified in all 30 districts in the southern state and 630 office bearers have already been appointed. 'The party has been careful to include representatives from across castes and given space to women as well. Of the 630 office bearers, about 200 are women, 225 from backward communities, 75 from SC/ST communities, 30 are Christians, and over 70% are youth,' the person said. The party has planned to target the Vijayan government over its alleged failure to attract investments leading to high unemployment and inflation among the states. According to the Periodic Labour Force Survey (PLFS) data for 2023-24, Kerala has one of the highest youth unemployment rates in India, at 29.9% for the 15-29 age group.
